EPA Sued for
Failing to Protect Farm Children (Beyond Pesticides, June 9, 2005) A lawsuit
was filed on June 7, 2005 against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) for failing to protect a generation of America’s most vulnerable
children that face increased risk from exposure to hazardous pesticides.
The suit was filed on behalf of the children by a coalition of farm workers,
environmental and public health groups, charging the agency with ignoring
the special risk to children growing up surrounded by the swirl of chemical
poisons on farms.

More than a million
children of farm workers live near farms in this country, and more than
300,000 farmers’ children under the age of six live on farms. These
children are particularly exposed to hazardous pesticides, from their
food, the air, soil and water, and even from the clothes of their parents,
according to a growing body of scientific evidence. Kids are especially
vulnerable to toxic effects of pesticides on their developing brains,
and bodies. The plaintiffs charge that EPA has failed to consider farm
kids’ heightened exposure risks when setting allowable pesticide
standards for food.

“Children of
farm workers breathe pesticides that drift from the fields, and they often
live, play, and go to school right next to pesticide-treated orchards,”
said Erik Nicholson of the United Farm Workers of America, AFL-CIO, which
represents tens of thousands of farm workers whose families can be exposed
to pesticides. “It’s common sense to protect our kids, but
EPA is ignoring them.”

“Congress required
EPA to set pesticide levels on food that provide a reasonable certainty
of no harm to America’s children, including those living on or near
farms,” said Michael Wall, senior attorney with NRDC, who represents
the plaintiffs. “EPA has abdicated its responsibility.”

Under the 1996 law,
the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), EPA is required to account for
specific factors when setting tolerance levels for chemical pesticide
residues that consumers and “major identifiable subgroups”
of consumers may be exposed to. In October 1998, the plaintiffs petitioned
EPA to identify farm children as meriting special protection. The groups
are suing EPA for failing to respond to the petition within a reasonable
amount of time.

“We can no longer
wait patiently while we hear every day from communities and individuals
directly affected by toxic pesticides,” said Margaret Reeves, Ph.D.,
senior scientist with Pesticide Action Network North America. “It’s
time to light a fire under EPA to force it to act to protect farm children’s
health.”

Scientists say children
are particularly susceptible to pesticide exposure, both because their
bodies and brains are still developing and because they eat more fruits
and vegetables and drink more water (for their size), and have more hand-to-mouth
contact with dust, dirt and floors. They come into contact with pesticides
that drift from fields into their homes, play areas and schools. When
parents return from fields, their children are exposed to hazards simply
from touching their clothing, hair and skin. Farm children often play
near recently sprayed fields and sometimes swim in irrigation canals filled
with pesticide-contaminated water.

The plaintiffs say
EPA is ignoring growing scientific evidence that farm children face increased
health risks because of pesticide exposure. The exposure is linked to
neurological disorders, such as Parkinson’s disease, reduced cognitive
functioning and reduced coordination; developmental delays in infants
and children; reproductive harms, such as infertility, stillbirths, birth
defects and musculoskeletal defects; and cancer, including brain tumors,
leukemia, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, sarcoma and Wilm’s tumor.

“Studies have
shown elevated levels of pesticides in the homes and cars of farming families
that are absorbed by workers and their children,” said Shelley Davis,
co-executive director of the Farmworker Justice Fund, co-counsel for the
plaintiffs and board member of Beyond Pesticides. “Put together
with evidence of increased rates of cancer and birth defects among farm
workers and their children, this research raises a red flag,” said
Davis.

The lawsuit was filed
against EPA and its administrator, Stephen Johnson, in the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiffs are Pesticide
Action Network North America; United Farm Workers of America, AFL-CIO;
NRDC; Clean Water Action; and Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to
Pesticides. Farmworker Justice Fund and NRDC are serving as co-counsel
for the plaintiffs. The groups’ lawsuit asked the court to rule
that EPA’s failure to respond to their petition was unlawful and
to compel the agency to respond within 90 days.

The Natural Resources
Defense Council is a national, nonprofit organization of scientists, lawyers
and environmental specialists dedicated to protecting public health and
the environment. Founded in 1970, NRDC has more than 1 million members
and e-activists nationwide, served from offices in New York, Washington,
Los Angeles and San Francisco.

The Farmworker Justice
Fund Inc., is a non-profit education and advocacy group, based in Washington
D.C., that works to improve the living and working conditions of migrant
farmworkers and their families.

In related news, recently
Beyond Pesticides took action against the state of Florida on behalf of
a community in Immokalee, Florida seeking action for three babies born
to farmworkers with severe birth defects. The babies were linked only
by the tomato fields, in which their mothers picked from, according to
the Associated Press and the Miami Herald One baby was born without arms
or legs. The other was born with Pierre Robin syndrome, which results
in an underdeveloped jaw that causes his tongue to fall into his throat
with the risk of choking and the third child was missing a nose, ear,
and sexual organs, and died after three days.

The three women who
gave birth to these babies and the fathers all lived within 200 feet of
one another at the same migrant labor camp in Immokolee, called Tower
Cabins and all tomatoes when they became pregnant in 2004. However, Dale
Dubberly, chief, Bureau of Compliance Monitoring, Florida Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Affairs, told The Palm Beach Post that the defects
”may have nothing to do with pesticides, but we’ll try to
get the facts.”